Good evening, Littleton, and welcome to the April 22nd, 2026 board of health meeting. Uh, present today are board members Matt Wson, Kevin Davis, and Dan Kaine, and our health director, Francis Dagel. We are going to get started with
our 700 p.m. public hearing on Zero Elm Road. If you are in attendance and a part of that agenda item, please raise your hand so we can promote you to the group. Steve Marsh for Zero Elm Road. >> Good evening, Steve.
>> Good evening. I'm here requesting two variances um or actually one variance for uh regulation 23 and 27 fill within 10 ft of a property line and a retaining wall
for a new construction. >> All right. And can you uh share plans with us so we can all see and you can walk us through uh what the project looks like? >> Geez, I wish I could do that, but I'm unable to do it. All right, Francis, would you be able to pull it up and show
it for us? If I may just give you a quick history on this. A number of years ago, prior to Littleton having their own board of health, um this project was permitted and um then they couldn't find any
records at Nishoba or at um at your board of health. Okay, Steve, are you able to see our plan showing then? >> Yes, I am. >> Okay. So, what what can what should we look at and walk us through the details, please? >> Okay. Basically, uh the the house is on
the front of um what is considered to be Elm Road. It is unpaved. It comes in off of Washington Street. I'm um there's really no construction in the front of the house as most of that land is either owned by the Conservation Commission or
the town. There is one property behind me with new construction and a property to the left of Elm Road which is a significant distance away from me. Um it's treed and I believe a number of
years ago I had given a grading easement to the Abutter to the left of me. So, what I have there, if you look on the um on the plan, the uh property is completely um like like I said, kind of isolated in
and of itself. It's not really close to anything except for the property behind me. And then I have a retaining wall with some fill um within 10 ft. the lot slopes. Um, so the back wall won't be that high, but the side walls,
the one of significance, the one that's closest to anybody would be the the left side of it. But there is a significant um distance between myself and the other property from the house itself. >> Okay. So the uh the property line is
that the you know furthest out rectangle that's showing on here. >> Yes. >> Okay. And then that's a retaining wall around three sides of the property. >> Correct. >> Okay. And then if you could zoom in uh Francis on that and walk us through the
system and then remind us then what uh what the variance request will be please. So, we basically have a 1500-gallon septic tank with a pump chamber to um it looks like one, two,
two trenches, three trenches with the reserve area in between the trenches. So that'll basically be a flat backyard for the subject property. And again, we're surrounded by
conservation and um and town owned property. The property to the right of me is town owned and the all the property in the front of me is owned by uh cons or controlled by the conservation commission. So the properties around me will never be built
on. And a number of years ago, I tried to get a grading easement um from the town. They just don't do that on town owned property. So, I'm restricted to um my only viable means of accommodating the septic would be through the um use of
the retaining wall. There's no other alternative for this. >> Okay. Um, Francis, can you um provide your review and uh recommendations? >> Sure. Um, not too much to say. It is a vacant lot. It I believe it has been on
the market for sale for a while. Um, like Steve said, we do not have any records of past permits being approved for this. Um, we did receive the plan originally a few months ago and um, it had to go
through three reubmissions for um, revisions that were required. The first time being the most significant revisions required. Um, I I think it's important to note the retaining wall is a significant feature
of this property. In the past, I know the board has talked about retaining walls and for a vacant property. I guess the question would be does it meet the threshold to require a variance. I basically would um just like to suggest that there is no other
alternative for me. I had granted um the abund to the left of me um a grading easement if he needed it years ago. I really have no neighbors. This doesn't impact anyone other than um than somebody that might be coming down um
Washington Drive is a private road. So, the only people um that it would impact would be them if they looked off to the right, but they both have retaining walls as does the new property behind me. And that's brand new construction.
And it's a series of um stepped retaining walls. So I'd be looking at them, too. So, the language of the variance that you're requesting approval on is is what exactly? >> Um, I'd be looking for a variance to be
to have fill within 10 ft of my property line and to utilize the retaining wall to accommodate the septic system. >> Okay. Questions from the board? Uh, Kevin Baker. Uh, thanks Mr. Chair. Uh, Francis, did
we receive a a cover letter on a plot plan with this certified stamped? >> We did not. >> I think that's one of our requirements for for hearing this. I think we should >> I believe I submitted that subsequent to
um I did submit it um a separate plan for um for the retaining wall. There was a um a a separate survey in addition to this on a separate um separate submitt.
I submitted this electronically so I know it's in there. This plan was originally approved under um uh the designer was Russ Wilson who since passed away um who was also a surveyor and he had done the survey
originally. >> Steve, do you remember what year that was approved? >> Um oh my god, no I do not. I could run through my records and see when Russ Wilson died, they threw everything away that he had. They just
came in and cleaned everything out. Can you would is that something you can check, Francis, to see if it was um downloaded on the um through that permitize? I think it was done as a separate attachment.
>> So, you applied a couple of times under different varying permit applications. So, I'd have to go through all them again to determine which one has it. They're all a little different, which makes it confusing. >> Sure. >> Um, >> it would have been under the last submitt with this one,
>> right? So, is it safe to assume that soil testing was done in 14 and the plan was done around the same time that was approved? >> Um, it could have been. Yes. Yep. >> Okay. Um, so the town was with Nishova
under Jim Geri for the most part. Um, so we can confirm with Jim whether it in fact was permanent at the time. >> Yep. >> What is the uh is it is it two years from the date of the permit before it expires?
>> Oh, yeah. they can request a third year or extension if long as it's still within the two years. >> Yeah, this is so old that we would we decided to just be when the when the materials were lost in transit from the show to the town
um we decided just to do a new one and GFI has verified the um soil testing too. that this is they did have the log books >> fortunately. >> Uh Mr. Chair. >> Uh go ahead.
>> I'd like to make a motion to continue. >> Um do we want to see if the public has any comment? We can um Kirk Fitzpatrick has raised his hand. >> Go ahead, Kirk. >> Hi, can you hear me? >> Yes.
>> I just had a question on a clarification. At what point does a poured reinforced concrete retaining wall require a stamp by a structural engineer? >> At what height? >> Four feet.
>> Yeah. Anything over four feet, I would need to have it structurally stamped. Yes. Because typically when I submit a plan with a retaining wall, well I don't generally do retaining walls that that are as tall as this one appears to be,
but uh that doesn't look like a structural survey or structural engineering stamp on there. That's what I was just curious about that. It's not a structural It's not a structural one because I'm looking um at possibly having um the concrete
block one similar to what's being used behind me. >> Okay. It just looks uh I I thought that once walls got over a certain height, they needed to be poured. Um it looks like you It looks like that wall's about
8 ft tall exposed at some points. >> That's that's that's not true. So, whoever told you that, Kirk, >> that what? >> That they have to be poured. >> Well, at some point when the walls get that tall, you have an unbalanced fill and you need a significant footing to
make sure it doesn't tip over. So, >> I think that that's where you end up with a structural engineer involved, >> right? No, it definitely would have a structural engineer for sure. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Well, I'm just curious because there's there's a there's a wall on the plan that shows a depth of a footing and
I'm just curious if that's been engineered >> because it's not stamped by a structural engineer. So, but that that was my question for future knowledge in in >> sure >> in what I do. So, that's it. >> The um the the designer does have a
structural engineer on staff for for this particular project. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. and uh Melissa Man will bring you in. Did you have a question or comment?
>> Yeah, Kyle Man um a butter uh at 37 Dogwood. I just wanted to be clear, Steve mentioning the retaining walls of my property. um they in no way, shape or form are involved in the septic system grading and they are 15 ft from the
property line where Steve's wall is proposed 12 in from the property line, 9 ft tall. And I just want to be clear on uh one thing I noticed in the plan, the wall detail scale is incorrect
in relation to his detail. He has a 4 foot 3 inch footing, which DP um regs state that the offset needs to be from the footing, but the wall in the plan only scales to be 3 ft. So that would
reduce the offset from the system to the wall on the right side to 7.85 85 ft, which um D wants 10 ft of separation to a uh retaining wall. Um and then I'm
also concerned with the 12 in off the property line. Um the the detail shows exposed walls at the height of 9 ft tall at the highest and the uh the detail for
the for the retaining wall has the footing 4 ft below grade with 9 in protruding towards the outside properties. So there would be a 4ft deep hole dug essentially 3 in from the from
the property line. Um but h how that construction would take place I'm not sure but um you know so given that fact the walls you know from from top of wall to bottom of footing at one spot is as
tall as 13 ft um with 9 ft exposed. So um and you know obviously the meeting will be continued and drainage will be discussed and all that but um the catch basins down at the front of the property. I also don't see how those
could be uh installed to to work given the fact that they're a foot from the structure and a foot from the property line. I want to be clear too for for the board members that are looking at this plan. This is a a 10 scale, not a 20 scale. I know we're all used to looking
at 20 scale plans. So, just please keep that in mind. This this this structure is 10 ft from the property line and 15 ft off the street. The wall is 1 ft back from the property line. So, I think that the scale is a good thing to note for anybody who hasn't spent much time
looking at this plan. But, um yeah, I mean, I'm I'm pro I'm pro building and and and pro construction when it when it makes sense. But this is uh this is a plan that I'm sure all the board members have never really seen before. And as as an a butter, I'm just more concerned about how this thing could possibly be
constructed. And obviously the way it's going to look um is going to be kind of wild given the fact that there's 9 ft of uh poured concrete exposed here. And you know that that brings up Kirk's question
of when does the uh the wall start to be considered a structure? And given the fact that this thing's 12 inches from the property line, I think that that that should be a discussion had with Henry. And uh but more than anything, I just wanted to be clear that my retaining wall on my site has nothing to
do with the septic system and it's 15 ft from the property line. >> Yeah, thank you for your comments. If I may answer that, you know, his lot slopes right down into my lot. So, the
back part of that wall is likely going to be not as um visible. I know that he's concerned about his house because he's got a brand new house um and he's going to be trying to sell it and my house would impact him. So, you know, I
just want to be clear on that as well that uh but I'm in compliance with everything else. I'm a grandfathered lot. Uh, and I have no alternative unless I can get a groundwater offset um by utilizing um an alternative
um you know like a fast system or something like that which I'd be happy to have designed um to reduce the height of the wall if that's if that's the case. But I have no I have no neighbors except for the house behind me essentially.
There's one brand new house behind me that slopes into my property. >> There's an butter on the left side as well that's on school vacation this week. So they they couldn't make it. But um but I think also I said a lot of
things right in a row but to to keep in mind that the scale on the wall is wrong. It's incorrect and it needs to be revised to show the the correct offset from the system which is 7.85 ft which is not viable on D rags which I have in
front of me right now. And D also D's rags also say that when walls and um barriers are used and there's filled up property lines that wells need to be provided on the downhill side. And I don't think 12 in gives enough room to
create a swale for water to run in any sort of reasonable direction. Not to mention the construction of this wall. Digging 4 ft down 12 in off the property line is is impossible. But >> all right, M. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Um would you remind me
what your address was again? >> 37 Dogwood. >> Okay. 37. All right. Thank you. Um we'll take your comments into consideration. Appreciate your input. Um, I thought I saw one other hand in the audience. Was there anybody else that wanted to provide input?
Looks like not. Um, we do have a motion to continue on the table. Um, if I don't hear a second immediately, I would ask uh just based upon these plans, the test holes were done in 2014. >> Correct.
and and I haven't dealt with something like that. Francis, is there a expiration date on test holes? >> No. >> Or plans in general? >> Depends on topography, but we have typically done up to 20 years basically
for um perk tests in the past. >> Okay. So on the continuence, if I just may ask, what what am I doing? Am I I'll I'll review and see what um Mr. Man's concerns are with regard to scale. Um, I
will validate >> my my the reasoning behind my uh motion for a continuence was to have you properly submit uh the cover letter requesting the variances as well as a certified plot plan that's required to
accompany your septic design >> and also uh you should dig up that information on any past permitting that was done there for Mr. Griffy. >> I've already tried. They don't have anything. I would also like that was. So that's why I started over.
>> So as far as we're concerned, it's a brand new, you know, it's a brand new permit application. >> Yeah. My my concern is this board uh does not have a history of allowing any variances on new construction. >> Okay. So >> I'd like to see the package submitted in
full uh so the board can take a look at it. >> Okay. And my contention, uh, Mr. Baker, is that I did submit it. U, I'm happy to agree to the continuence just to validate that and verify it. I did send a cover letter, spoke to Heidi at the board of health, did all my paperwork
properly prior to this. Um, but I'm happy to do the continuence and I will get the um, and just to make sure that those two uh, things are in in the uh, package for you on the next meeting. >> Thank you. Um, Dan Kane, do you have any
questions? >> Um, yeah. No, thank you. I do have a couple. So, one, we whether we could find that old approval or not, we're looking at even with an extension, it would still have been more than 10 years. So, that's really immaterial
whether that's or not or whether that's a permit or not. It's this would be a new request either way. Um, I know we had some of Butters. It sound like we had some conservation land and butters as well. Um and with that offset that while it's outside of our scope um
for those walls, I'm curious if this has been approved by conservation and zoning. Um just I would hate to approve a a project and have zoning or conservation say the offsets are are too small. Um,
>> I I that because it um I have to have a letter from the um the building department um has already determined that it was a a buildable lot um a number of years ago. And as far as conservation, here's the thing. Prior to
Mr. man buying the property. Um, which I suspect they did under a repair for the new construction. I had told the people prior to his purchase that I would grant them a grading easement as well as Kirk's uh people to the left when uh Keenan built the house. I said, "Sure, you know, we can you can certainly have
a grading easement, which I believe might be even in the file for for Kurt's clients um saying that I granted that or said that I would be amendable to it to the left. And the only other um entity that would be of concern to the retaining wall
would be to the right, which is town- owned property. And they don't typically, although I've got them in the past, grading easements for uh from the town of Littleton on town owned property. I have I have got them. Um but we did ask and they said that they
weren't doing it anymore. Was there any language from zoning since obviously 12 in offset for a 9 foot wall? >> Um that that's a building issue. So in the although I'm grandfathered and I can
go right to the property line. Um this may be a zoning board of appeals issue um if the building department considers it a structure. So you know we're not out of the woods. I would still have to go through. I'm just getting trying to get the septic approved.
>> Right. I'm I'm I'm I'm one to be honest. So I understand it's been a grandfather build of a lot. However, I'm always leerary about significant variances for a new construction. Um so I'm I really want to make sure that we're clear about this. I'm always very
very l I said new construction the need for variances is concerning. um in this case >> there there's a lot of construction to make this >> a variable acceptable system rather than
even a just a system. So I that's kind of where my concern is. The amount of fields associated with this is concerning both with runoff for that neighborhood as well as with the size of the construction. Um I'm I'm concerned with offsets. Um concerned with the plan
that's been presented. You said it's it's presented as poor. You saying that might not be the fact might not be the case. Obviously before I personally would like to agree with it. I want to know what your final plan is. So that's a little bit concerning that you have a plan that you said you presented as this
is the plan and you said well but it might not be. That's a bit of a concern for me. >> Okay. So then I will just agree to do what is on the plan. We'll do port. Um but I do look at alternatives. um if if there were issues with it, if somebody
had a had a concern about it. So sometimes aesthetically a poured wall um is unappealing if somebody's that concerned about it. So we'll do um you know like those concrete block walls,
but again there's really nobody looking at this particular property. You can't see it. It's in the middle of the woods with the exception of the abutter behind me. So, I'll get the cover letter and the plot plan and then schedule for the next
meeting if that's amendable. >> I think I'm all set at the moment, Matt. >> Very well. I don't I don't have any further questions at this time. So, we have a motion to continue. >> I'll second the motion.
>> We have a motion. A second. Roll call vote. Kevin Baker. >> Baker votes yes. >> Dan Kane. >> Dan Kane votes yes. >> And Matt Wson votes yes. So motion continue is granted and we will get you on the calendar for a future meeting. Um
please work with Francis um >> I will >> make sure all the boxes are checked and all the questions are ideally answered beforehand just so we use your time efficiently as well. Um and so if it's not if we can't get it on the very next meeting in a couple of weeks, we can put it out push it out a little further from
that too. So >> very well. Thank you very much. >> Thank you for coming. >> Thanks. All right, that takes us to our 705 agenda item, a continued public hearing on 100 King Street. If you are a part of that project, please raise your hand so
we can invite you to talk. Oh, >> all right. Let me see you. >> Sorry it took me a minute to get there. >> Oh, no problem. No. >> So, uh, we're here again because, um, I showed the slope of the ceilings on the
plan like you asked last time and we also filed a deed restriction as required by you guys. Um, and I submitted all those back to you guys. And um so just to recap from the last meeting, um the proposed project is a building permit that came in that is
requesting to remodel the third floor of an existing house. Um it's an 8 roombedroom house, including four bedrooms. Um there was questions about this space being previously finished, but not noted in any documentation from the town, including the assessor's
department. um and an indication from a past listing when it was last for sale in 2007 as the third floor being uninhabitable space. So the question was whether this room will these three rooms that are being proposed be counted towards the room count and also looking
at square footage um and by extension approving the building permit that sits before the town. >> Sure. Go ahead. Uh we had also discussed at the last meeting the applicant uh drawn the plan where the ceilings were below acceptable height head height and
that was going to reduce the square footage of a room making it less than 70 ft and reducing the room count and requiring a deed restriction uh on the property
and that's where we are. >> All right. Can we then >> Francis did those plans came in? They all looked like they said they were going to look. >> Yes. >> Uh for the benefits of all, could we then show the plan briefly and just review that?
Johnny, you able to do that or No, >> I can't do that. No. I bang nails for a living. Not computers are not my thing. Okay. Sean, if you just want to walk through this. >> Um, yeah, the new plan, you could see we
put the slope ceiling dotted lines on. Um, the small room that was in question next to the bathroom. Um, I also noted the measurement there of the 6'11 and I think underneath the state codes or it's anything room less than 7 ft also
doesn't count as a room. Um, so I I think that one meets it both ways, not only just with the slope ceiling, but also with the bathroom wall cutting it down. Um, and I can make sure when I build it that it's at 611 if if that also helps. But I I think that covers that to knock that room right off the
room count. Um, and we changed it. So, it's it's a home office, right? You saw us broadcasting from her office. This is what she does. She's online in her house all the time. So, I took off the conference room and put on the home office. So, it makes most sense now.
>> Thank you for that clarification. I I know the rune count from uh septic system is not quite as strict on measurements. Um Francis can clarify that, but I I believe it's always a little more looser of a of a of an interpretation, so it's not as exacting,
but I I get what you're kind of pointing out. Um does that constitute a room as a space? So, I wasn't a part of the previous conversation, but it looks like this this room here would either make it either be the 11th room or not big enough to be a room. Is that correct?
>> Believe so. Yes. >> Okay. Um, so here's the updated plan. This is new to everybody. There are our low head height angled uh ceiling areas and Okay, Francis, any other input summary from you?
>> Um, I do not have any other input. Thank you. >> Questions from the board? Kevin Baker? >> I have no questions. and Dan Kaine. >> Dan Kane. No, thank you for the updates and the and the clarifications on the plan. I have no no questions.
>> Very well. Uh, this looks like it makes sense to me. So, I don't have any questions, >> Mr. Chair. >> Go ahead, Mr. Mayor. >> I'd like to make a motion to approve as presented with a need restriction for a four-bedroom home.
I'll second. >> All right, we have a motion in a second. Roll call vote. Kevin Baker. >> Kevin Baker votes yes. >> Dan Kane. >> Dan Kane votes yes. >> And Matt Wson votes yes. So project approved and um good luck with your buildown. >> Thank you very much, guys. Appreciate
your time. >> Thank you. All right. Our next agenda item is a 7:10 p.m. public hearing on 10 Beaverbrook. If that is your project, please raise your hand. Good evening. I'm Kirk Fitzpatrick with Civil Solutions and I'm here in behalf
of Don and Joanne Lion for their property at 10 Beaverbrook Road and I'd be happy to share the plan. >> Yes, please. Welcome back. >> Thank you. >> There we go.
So, >> basically what we have proposed before you is a septic upgrade for the existing three-bedroom dwelling. Uh, currently it's served by thousandgalon tank right behind the house and then a leech air right behind the driveway. >> Sorry, Kirk, could you could you zoom in
on that a bit? >> Oh, sure. Certainly. >> Small on mine. >> There we go. >> Beautiful. Thank you. So, it's got an existing thousand-gallon tank right behind the house. And then the leeching area is this dash line behind the turnout of the driveway.
Um, the lot's composed of 41,944 square ft. It's 150 ft wide, just over 300 ft deep. Uh, it's serviced by a well in the front yard. And this is the 100 foot well arc associated
with the well. So again, this failed a title five inspection. So it's an upgrade for the existing three-bedroom house. So instead of putting it right behind the house, knowing what the water table typically is in this area, we did the one next
door and we had a water table of 30 in, we decided to go back just inside the tree line to try to hide the the bump, the the anticipated bump. Um, so we did test hole one and we had 24 in of top and subs soil and
refusal at 76 in. So it's still the 4 ft of uh naturally occurring pvious soil and a water table 36 in. And then I figured I'd try to run the system parallel to the back of the house, but as you move to the right of the property, uh, the refusal comes much
closer to the surface. We refuse lift 24 in in this test wall. So I decided to try to work down a little bit. We had refusal at 44 in here. So then I did test tools two and three. And test tool two we had refusal at 66 in which was
still passing but a water table 28 in. So at that point we decided we'd push the system back into the wood line. Uh so we did test hole three where it actually was the deepest hole. Um, and we had uh 20 in of top and subs soil and
refusal at 7 ft with a water table of 30 in. Just figured I'd explain this why there's so many test holes on the plan. And I didn't do any more in this direction just cuz the refusal seem to be going up as we went to the right of the property. Uh so what we're proposing
is to come out to a new 1500-gallon two compartment septic tank that's going to feed a 1000-gallon pump chamber and that's going to push the liquid out to a system composed of the Presbyeptic that's 13 1/2 ft wide by 32 ft long. Um
we're proposing to uh have a twoft reduction in the groundwater offset. So this proposed system has a twoft offset because of the ledge in the area. Um, and I wanted to make sure it was centered over the test holes and also try to meet the offset to the property line as much as possible. The system
kind of cuts against the contours. So that twoft offset is right at the corner here where we hit elevation 100. So by the time you get down to this corner, it is a 3-ft offset generally. Um, so with that being said, it is going to be raised. Uh, the finish grade over the
top of it is going to be elevation 102 and then it's going to slope off all the way around it. Um, so we're asking also for a variance or fill within 10 feet of a property line. We maintain the five foot offset to the property to the left with the toe of the slope. Um, the systems actually we had a record
percolation rate of 9 minutes an inch and we actually designed it based on 20 minutes an inch. We did the soils testing right in the beginning of March when all the snow was melting. So we didn't have an observed water table, but the conditions were not really suitable to run a new percolation test. So, I
thought I felt like the 20 minutes and inch was very conservative and I'd be happy to answer any questions the board may have. >> All right. Thank you, Francis. Give us your summary and recommendation, please. >> Um, so like Curt said, the soil
conditions and conditions in general were pretty poor out there. Um, essentially it limited really that only spot designated for the sighting of the new system. Um the reduction seems like a reasonable request because otherwise the system
would be higher and the fill would move past the property line. So given that it can only really go in one spot um and this would prevent the fill from going past the property line, it seems uh like a reasonable request. >> All right. Thank you. Questions from the
board. Kevin Baker. No questions and Dan Kane questions. >> No questions. >> Very well. Uh my only question is to make sure because we are going into um
the Phil within the property line. Were the utters doodly notified? >> Yes, they were. They were notified 10 days prior to the hearing. >> Very well. I see any anybody in attendance who has questions on this project. I'll take that as a no.
>> So, do we have a motion? >> Go ahead, Mr. Baker. >> I'd like to make a motion to approve the plan as presented. I'll second. >> We have a motion in a second to approve the plan as presented. Roll call vote. Kevin Baker. >> Kevin Baker votes yes.
>> Dan Kaine. >> Dan Kane votes yes. >> And Matt Wson votes yes. Thank you for your presentation and good luck with the project. >> Great. Thank you very much. Have a good night. >> Good evening. That brings us to our next public hearing. 7:15 p.m. Public hearing on 18
Long Lake. If that is your project, please raise your hand or is this Oh, sorry. Is this the one Francis that we are postponing? Okay, we can't hear you, but I believe so. Uh,
apologies that we are postponing that public hearing. So, um, point of order. It's on our agenda as a public hearing. So, we should probably, um, vote to continue it. >> I'll make a motion we continue.
>> N, we have a motion. >> A second. >> And a second. Roll call vote. Deon Baker. >> Deon Baker votes yes. >> Dan Kaine. >> Dan Kane votes yes. >> And Matt Wson votes yes. So, we will continue that to whatever meeting they'll be ready for. Francis, thank you.
All right, zipping along. Getting back on time. Not at all. So, our next item 7:20 p.m. public hearing on 21 Lakes Shore Drive. Is that you, Mr. Rogers? >> That is B indeed. >> Perfect. >> Thank you for letting me join in, gentlemen.
>> Take it away. >> Uh, okay. So again, I know no one likes to hear anything about their poor skills at uh the computers, but I I've never had to present a plan. I've I've seen plenty of them. So
um so basically, just to give you the background before I even try to share the screen. So I've got a project proposed at 21's Lakeshore Drive. The client would like to build a garage and an art studio, kind of a two a dual uh property. no plumbing to the building.
It'll have power. Um they would like to put a small foundation on one side of it for storage. Uh again, the the structure will never be occupied, never be uh used for any kind of habitation.
And we will be within 20 ft of the system. And so I'm here before the board to ask if they would accept putting in a a 30 mil poly barrier between the system and the foundation or you know whatever
system or or process the board would prefer to see to allow for that basement to be built. >> Very well. Thank you for the intro. Now let's try to share the plan if you can. >> All right. Let me see. All right. So, let me see if I can give
you so that so we have gone through the deed restriction process. Um, I've got a copy of the plan there. And let's see. So, I don't know if you can see that uh again. So one other share.
All right. So I'm going to be perfectly honest. Say I don't know how to do this. >> Fair enough. >> Um >> you can try right in the middle of the uh Zoom window at the bottom should be that share button and then you can >> I see that now. Yep. >> Okay. Then you can either pick the
application to share or just your desktop in case you don't uh have other things you want us to see. And it is sharing. Give us a second. There you go. >> That's that is that is magic to me. >> You are now a professional. >> Uh there you go. So So what again? So here's Lakeshore Drive. Here's the
proposed uh garage and art studio up in the upper left hand side. Uh coming out on Juniper Road. Um, I can share the other plans I have, but you can see the system is is really kind of just north looking at the plan of the existing
house. And what we're proposing is 14 ft, which is to the vent. So, the system is a little bit to the right of that uh to the foundation wall of the proposed garage and art studio. >> All right, Francis, can you give us uh
your review and recommendations? Sure. Um so this came through with two items. Um wanted to be adding additional rooms to the house essentially as an extension. Um as well as the variance for the setbacks. Um I did talk to the
applicant originally about whether he wanted to do a slab instead of the foundation um not requiring a variance essentially. Um and the homeowner felt strongly that they did want to have that basement space. Um, and if we refer to the floor plan, the house itself is pretty minimal
in space. So, I think that's not an unreasonable request. Um, I also think the poly barrier adds enough protection in this case. Um, not much else I think to say about the project. Um, can you enlighten us on the room
count? Did you look at plans for the existing building and what this would do? >> Uh, yes. There you go. Let me see. And what is the system rated for right now?
>> This is for a two-bedroom house, I think. >> Can you jump and see that? >> Yes, we can see that. >> Okay. So, that is that is the room layout right there. And as soon as you are satisfied with that, I can give you um I do have a copy of the permit
and the uh and the installers as built uh and then also have a copy of the deed restriction which we put in place uh as part of the process. Okay. So yeah, everybody comfortable with that? It's a two bedrooms upstairs
and three rooms on the main floor. Okay, go ahead, Chris. >> Okay. So, can you see that now? The >> Yeah, that your asbuilt. >> Yep. >> Raft. Yes. and then a copy of the permit. Uh again,
calling it out as a two-bedroom >> and then show us the the design for the new structure. Yeah, that drawing. >> Um sure. Let me see. I did put that in there. Uh can you see that?
>> Yeah. >> Okay. So, basically, so the and thank you for asking that. So basically to your left is uh you know to your right is Lakeshore where the house is to your left is the uh is Juniper Road and you can see the staircase into the basement
or the proposed basement of that section right there. So most of it will be just slab on grade but we would have that small storage area underneath. And then the the main floor of that building is is how many rooms or just
one single open space? >> Uh two rooms. So to the right is you can see a partition wall there. >> The left hand side is the garage. The right hand side is the art studio. >> Okay. So that's an unfinished garage. >> Uh it'll be um I mean yes. I mean it'll
it'll have well it will have plaster walls. I mean it'll be I mean frankly I think it's going to be more of a a wood shop than a garage space. Um so again we are proposing again to fully insulated to uh you know to plaster the
walls. Um you know it'll be a concrete floor. Okay. Um thank you for that. We'll pause there and go to the board for questions. Evan Baker, what do you have? >> Francis, is the regulation it needs to
be 20 ft off full foundation, full basement? >> Yep. Uh 20 for foundation, 10 for slab. >> And what is it now as proposed? >> 14. >> 14 ft. >> 14 ft. So you need six feet of crawl space and
then start your full basement >> essentially >> or six feet of slab. >> Um well the so the long side is actually you know the the opposite side if you look at the upper plan. Um,
so it would be 14 ft to the foundation wall. I mean, it might be a little bit more than 14 given that that's kind of it's it's I'm not going to say it's quite 1/3 2/3, but um again, we would put run the poly barrier along the entire length of the even
this, you know, the slab portion just to make sure that there's no break in that protection. I understand what you're proposing. I'm just stating what the regulation would require. >> Right. So regulation Yeah. 20 ft to to concrete uh to a foundation wall uh 10
ft to slab um in in Bolton historic you know not historic what we what we have done in situations like this is is we've accepted a poly barrier you know some some form of of protection between the edges system and the foundation wall to
reduce the offset >> yeah historically I think we just make you be 20 ft off the off the full basement in Littleton Again, understand that and I'm not arguing that. Um, but again, just want to try to be clear on behalf of my clients that
this is this is a it's a storage space. Uh, it's it's it's a a garage or an accessory building. It's not a it's not a residence or will will never be, you know, inhabited by people. Um, so I'm hoping that the board would would look at that and say, "Okay, there's a a
lower level of of potential disaster or damage here. >> Thank you. >> Uh, Dan Kane, questions." >> Uh, yeah, I'm kind of in that same place with Mr. Baker that, you know, obviously just
like with our one of our previous cases that, you know, treating new construction a little bit different than what it looks like as you're trying to replace a failed system around something else. So, this is kind of looking at the other side of adding structure to an
existing system. Excuse me. And I agree. I'm I'm kind of torn of I I think polyarrier probably would be accurate and if this was an existing structure and we're putting a system in and it was the only way it would work. Again, I'm a little
bit more hesitant when we have a we're adding structure around a system and we're not in compliance with it. I I agree. I'm a little bit more concerned about that. Um my other question is certainly was the room count. I understand it's an accessory building. Um but it is adding at least one room to
that. It's not heated. Excuse me. It's not plumbed, but it is a heated finished space. And how does that work around our our room count? >> Um, so we have a deed restriction in place. So deed restricting the property
to two bedrooms. >> And what's the total room count including this new art space? >> Um, let's see. One, two, three, four. So, I would count five rooms in the uh primary and this would add a a garage. Again, whether you whether you
call, you know, count a garage as a room. Uh but if you were to count the art studio space or the um that space, then it would be six. Okay. So with with the need restriction, I think that's probably acceptable from my perspective. I'm I'm still a little
bit I understand the desire for storage below, but I am a little bit concerned with new construction that's require a variance right out the door. I'm I'm and I'm still pouring. Um but I don't have any other questions at the moment.
Um, I would, uh, since you just brought up, I would clarify that I would count it as seven rooms. While you're using the name garage for the space, it's fully insulated and heated. >> Okay. >> So, I I would count that as a room. Um, it could have a garage door on one wall,
but I I think that's a like I said, as soon as it's fully insulated and you have HVAC going in there, I would consider a room. So, yes, I have concerns about the total room count. And then similarly we are trying to stand on our precedence of new construction which this is new construction um should not
be requesting these variances um especially which correct me if I'm wrong Mr. Rogers but if Mr. Baker presented a solution to say, "Well, can you just push the foundation part of the basement back 6 ft?" Is that is that an end all
for the for the homeowners on this project? If that basically kind of resolve that aspect of it, it >> Well, it's it's uh it's a so if you can if you look at it, it's an incredibly tight lot. Um, and so to move that six
inches, you know, if we're talking it's 20, uh, I mean, if we're to try and push that one side 6 ft over, I mean, one, you know, you're going to get 18 ft of width. I mean, not enough, you know,
where you going to put a staircase. Um, and again, it it becomes a little bit more of a complicated, uh, you know, concrete problem. Um because again we're trying to do this, you know, as as cost-effectively as we can for the client as well. Um you know, probably
would not make it worth exploring. Um because again, we kind of need the space for the for the stair access. um be you know and again because of the
offsets really can't put a can't even put a a bulkhead on you know what I'll call the west and southern face just because we would be putting structure into that offset and the the 14T separation can you maybe
potentially zoom in on that drawing but where is the system where are we setting came back from. >> Okay. So, 14 ft. So, let me let me scroll. Let me give you the other plan. The um >> where am I going here?
So, basically, so so this you're going to need to reorient yourself, I guess. So, looking at the asbuilt, the vent is on the on the on the bottom right hand side. And so, basically the 14 ft would be from the vent. You're kind of looking at the plan the other
way. Now, um 14 ft would be from the vent to the the concrete wall. And again, it would it would start out as as directly across would be slab, but moving back a little bit. I don't think enough to get to gain the 20 ft. >> Um
you know, for >> Yeah. So, you're so you're it's not like you're avoiding a line. Uh you're avoiding almost a point for that. So, >> um yes. Is there an angle that you can work with that you can keep that foundation wall 20 ft away? Um
>> and and and unfortunately again it's such a tight space um that we really can't we really can't move that structure anywhere. It's really kind of pinned
where it is uh because of the lot shape. >> Yeah. Mr. Baker, go ahead. >> Question for Mr. Rogers. Uh, do you have I I saw you had an asbuilt? >> Yep. >> Uh, are you able to move that vent?
>> Well, I'm not sure. Um, the moving the vent will help me because the vent is at the edge of the structure. Um, >> I'll put one in at my house and the vent was 20 ft from the system. >> Okay.
>> So, so you better look. Oh, in terms of can I move it or? >> Yeah. And he also made me cut my basement off by 7 feet because I wasn't 20 ft from the system >> at your house. >> Yeah. >> Oh, >> okay.
>> So, you should look at the asbelt, take a measurement, come back. Um, I can do that. But what am I just so I'm clear? What am I measuring? Are you so you're saying that the vent is not I I I can move the vent or
>> I don't know you gota measure >> what if that vent is not right up against the system. If you had if you could move that vent six feet back and there's no system between there there if there's a gap right this is just a hand drawing. So, he's saying, "Yes, >> go back and evaluate and say, what if
that's not actually accurately drawn that could be moved, >> then you could actually gain some of your footage, >> you know, I I would appreciate the opportunity to try that. Thank you for that that window. Um, my, you know, so I'm a Title 5 inspector as well, so I
did do a tenative. I didn't do a full title 5. I just did a quick location of the of the structures. It's a it's pretty tight. So, I'm I'm going to believe that this is exactly where it is, but would be willing to come back to you guys uh if I find out otherwise.
Now, I do I think I'm going to buy >> Yeah, but I don't in a perfect I mean, it would be great if I found six feet, >> but I don't think I am. >> I'd like to make a motion to continue. But before I have any second to that and
go to a vote, um we want to obviously make sure that when we're coming back for that continuence that we're kind of addressing the right things. And so, Miss Rogers, it I think you're hearing quite clearly that the board is concerned about the lack of a 20- foot offset to that foundation. And
I think you should be encouraged to >> we've thrown out a couple ideas in this meeting, but I think you want to explore whatever avenues you can to address that. Um I think the other piece that I'm going to turn back to my board members for maybe some brief discussion
is what about the room count? If this is a seven room property on a two-bedroom system, um I I wouldn't want a lot of work to go into figuring out our 20 foot setback to the system, but then have a
room count conversation come up. So, could we discuss that a little bit first? And maybe Francis if you have input on some precedents as well of our historical. I know two-bedroom systems are not the common thing we discuss this on but I think we should have a little
round table here. >> Um All right. Should do you want me to address that Matt or >> No. Huh? I want to hear from our board members and and director here on this one. Anyone want to go first? Go ahead, Kevin.
>> Two too many rooms. >> So, >> by the typical higher bedroom count systems, yes. But we've had discussions about the two-bedroom systems and are they counted differently because of that? And I can't
remember the details on that. It's been a while because I thought it was I I thought even on a two-bedroom system, it was you were kind of allowed, well, every house is still going to have a kitchen and a dining room and a living room, so you're at five automatically. So,
you know, like the rules I thought were not as clearly defined as using our formula to calculate it, but correct me if I'm wrong. >> Can't speak to that right now. I don't I don't know a precedent where that has occurred. >> Okay.
>> Dan, do you have any recollection? >> No, I I do know we had this conversation. I'm not sure if we came to a final understanding. Um but you know we get that same thing that using our divide by two round if we need to is harder with just kind of large large
numbers with small systems that's not necessarily an accurate representation. Um and I'm not sure how we if we came to a final decision of what how best to do it because there are lots of different ways of being how best to do it.
Um, so I'm I'm agree. I'm a little bit concerned again with that that room count. I'm I'm not sure I would count the garage as a room, although I can see I can go either way on that one that does a garage door suddenly not make it a room because otherwise he insulated
and everything else. Um, I'm not sure if that was a basement. Yeah, it's a separate building with a garage door. I'm I'm not as clear. The fact that there is a art studio, which
is clearly a defined room as part of that structure, definitely a room. The garage portion right next door, same building, same insulation, same everything except that room, that room happens to have a very large door. If
that changed it, I'm I'm not I'm not as clear about that. I I would I could see it easily coming out of the room. I could see an argument that it's not. Um, but six versus seven, I mean, the concern is still there's it's a two
bedroom system. And how do we best treat a two bedroom system fairly with that small room count total? I'm not positive. The best way of doing it. >> Um, thank you for that, Dan. And um that's my thing on the garage thing is
it's we again as we say repeatedly, it's not about the current owners and it's not about what they're going to be using for. It's about looking out for future owners of the property and such like that. And it's easy to go around communities and see people who've taken a garage door out and put in a wall and bam,
>> it's it's living space now. That's why I would lean towards counting as a room because it's effectively like you said, insulated, heated, and even if the garage door is leaking some air, it doesn't take much to actually just convert it um um without any attention from this board or any
other oversight. So, I think it I think we need to do a little bit of looking. Um Francis, lastly, do you have any thoughts about the two-bedroom systems and room counts? >> Um I don't recall any twobedroom. I can go back before the next meeting and see
what we have done historically over the past couple years. Um I think functionalitywise is the most important and because it's separate, how do you treat it? It's not like thinking of it like a basement, I guess. >> Okay. So, just let me hop in here very
quickly. So, um so my my my guess or my my gut is that I'm not going to be able to meet the 20 foot offset. So, I I'll probably go back to the client and we'll recommend that if they want to do this project that we propose a slab so that I I can meet the 10- foot, I can't meet
the 20 foot. Um, in terms of of room count, yes, I understand it's it's a it's a tough one. It is it's an accessory structure, but it does have heat. Um, but in this case, uh, you know, basically at Francis's recommendation, I
went ahead and we recorded we did a a two-bedroom deed restriction on the property. So, legally, it can never be more than two bedrooms. Now, I understand I'm the I'm the a member of my local my Bolton Board of Health. I I must have to say this thing every other meeting as well. What you're doing with
the property, we don't know what's going to happen three owners from now. But historically, we've accepted the deed, you know, the deed restriction as sufficient notice to any future buyers that that there is a definitive
bedroom count on this property that can't be exceeded. >> And and we follow the same except we do only allow we basically get to a point in Littleton where we say once you're at this rooms, you're fine. If you add one more room, it has to have a deer
section. and then we don't allow an additional room even with a deed restriction. So, that's what we just want to make sure that we're we're following our town's precedence for the two-bedroom, which I said not as common an option, but we'll look into it uh and we'll we'll get it figured out. And so,
I I think that's enough information for everybody to work forward towards the next meeting. So, now I will uh unpause and we do have a motion to continue from Mr. Baker. I'll second the motion >> and a second. And a roll call vote.
Kevin Baker. >> Kevin Baker votes yes. >> Dan Kane. >> Dan Kane votes yes. >> And Matt Wson votes yes. So uh thank you. Sorry. Thank you for your patience. I want to make sure we don't have to just come back and uh again continue and continue forever. So um I think people
have their homework and good luck trying to figure it out and we'll see you uh in the future. >> Very good. Thank you gentlemen. >> Thank you. Okay, that brings us to our 725 agenda item on the ID decision support tool, which has some technical difficulties
cuz I can't get into my board of health count right now. So, we'll have to uh just uh give you some highlights verbally. I got nothing to show you. Um so, typically we start with CO. So, um CO is statewide at the tail end of the
season it appears. Um, Littleton has had zero positive cases in a in a healthcare environment in two weeks. Um, the big variants out there are the XFG. There are a couple of those. They make up 50% of the cases around the area. Um, so
it's it goes back to um slightly different variants. They evolve over time and adapt better um genetic strains from their colleagues. all these co uh viruses that
we have. So um vaccine effectiveness is still showing quite good with the current variants. Um and the interesting uh thing I wanted to add now is the rapid testing uh rate is is actually not that great anymore. Um so a test from
your physician or healthcare provider office is still going to be the best thing. So basically what you should go by is if you think you might have COVID, go ahead and take your your rapid test and if it's positive, you almost assuredly have CO. But if it's negative,
there's actually maybe as much as a 50% chance that you do actually have COVID still. So, please, public service announcement, don't necessarily take a rapid test, especially that one that's been sitting in your pantry for the last 3 years and expired a while ago as a
gold answer to a no, you don't have CO. So, take care of yourself if you do get ill and um make sure you look out for those around you and your caregivers. On to the other seasons. The respiratory
illness seasons are winding down. RSV was kind of peaking a little bit again last time, but it's still on the downs slope. And then our arbo virus updates. U mosquitoes are out there. Hopefully a little cold weather here might uh dent that population. But arbo virus updates will actually start in June. So we'll
keep an eye on things, but unlikely that we'll have much of an update until June on that. Any questions? Great. Then that brings us to our 7:30 item which is administrative ma matters. The first we have three sets of meeting
minutes to approve. Uh Mr. Baker, Mr. Kaine, have you been able to review those minutes? >> I have. I have but I don't I think we can only approve can we can only look at the last set the March 25th
>> correct. So April 8th we cannot vote on because we do not have enough people who were present at that meeting. Uh March 2nd we cannot vote on because we don't have enough people at the meeting. And that brings us to March
25th which we can vote on. No, we can't because Kevin Baker wasn't there. We can't vote on any. Is that my analysis correct there? No arguments. We'll take that as a yes. Okay,
that brings us to Sorry, Heidi. We'll just keep stacking up the minutes and someday we'll be able to approve them all. Thank you for getting done in a timely manner. I'm sorry, we 7:35 agenda item is now just
correspondence, board member updates and such. Who would like to give us some more updates first? >> I had some correspondence. >> Go ahead, Dan. Uh, I had a um someone reach out looking for the best way to dispose of sharps here in town. I know
Nishoba has uh I think we talked about this a bit ago that the show is still willing to accept accept sharps and we're going to see what explorers or any other options we may have for here in town for sharps disposal. So, I'm just not sure if anything came from that.
Um, we're trying to have an article on the fall town meeting to have a um, it looks like a revolving count is the best way to do that. Um, so that will most likely go into effect in the fall after it goes to town meeting. Um, it's pretty
easy to stand up from there. Um, we do have containers already in house so we have enough to get going as well. We can find a secure spot which is really the big requirement to store them. Um, contracts are fairly similar. There's about three companies in Massachusetts that are most widely used. So, we'll
just go with the cheapest bid. Um, there would be a small fee attached to help keep the program level. Um, but otherwise, it'd be relatively cheap. >> No. Awesome. Thank you so much for that. I didn't realize we had a had a line item for time being. That's great to
hear. Thank you so much. I think that's all I had. >> Thanks, Dan. Gavin, you got anything? >> Francis, you got anything? >> Um, tick season's coming quick. Um, I don't know if you remember last year we
gave out um tickets with some educational materials to people in town. Um, so we're going to be doing that again this year. Last year we got 150 um tickets total. This year we doubled it to 300. So
>> those will be going out, right? >> Oh yeah. Two days last time we sold out. though. >> Okay, good. >> Um, we also did another series of soil testing today, all day at the Shaker Lane School. Um, so they're looking to
have some kind of plan together probably in June to just give you a heads up on that. Um, we'll give you far enough advanced notice with something in hand before meeting to ask any questions. >> Great. Uh board members, you have,
I believe, nine days to finish your 2026 cyber security awareness module if you have not already done that. If you have not, Kevin Davis will find out and he will contact you or he will
send somebody to talk to you. Um, I think the only other thing highlighted just by Dan's question about the sharps containers, um, we at the end of these meetings, we sometimes have those things that come up, those little one-offs. Um, and I would love it if we
could work to have some tracker of that so that we make sure it's brought up at a following meeting. um and potentially is an you know one of the second to last agenda items on the agenda to say kind of follow from prior um email doesn't go
out to the public so even if we get an email about an update that's not necessarily seen so I think it would be great it doesn't have to be long but if there was something that said hey here here are the updates from the last that we can provide um kind of a list of open items and then we can close them like
that um if Francis and Heidi are willing to help kind of facilitate that. So like I said, we just have a list at the bottom says, "Oh, you know, sharps container is still an outstanding question." Oh, good. Francis has found a solution or is working towards it line item on the uh fall meeting and go from
there. Um I know a lot of the things kind of come up and and we um we don't necessarily know if they were followed up on. So I'm sure lots of things are closed and we kind of talk it off our list, but I think having an update that people could hear would be beneficial. So,
and beyond that, I don't have anything else. Mr. Baker, >> let's make a motion to return. >> Uh, anybody in the audience have any other questions or comments? Sorry, I cut you off, Mr. Baker. What were you saying?
>> A motion to adjurnn. >> Uh, we have a motion and a second to adjurnn. Roll call vote. Kevin Baker. >> Kevin Baker votes yes. >> Dan Kane. >> Dan Kane votes yes. >> And Matt Wson votes yes. That concludes our meeting for April 22nd, 2026. Thank
you all.